UPDATE: 07/29/2011: ETHICS COMPLAINT PANEL FIND COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION MEMBER JOHN BRANDIFF DID NOT VIOLATE THE CODE OF ETHICSAS ALLEGED BY COMMUNITY ACTIVIST MIGUEL MORALES. TWO OTHER MEMBERS OF THE SAME PANEL COUNCIL CANDIDATE JOHN BRANDIFF SITS ON HAVE AN ALLEGED WORST RECORD OF ATTENDANCE THAN ANY OTHER PANEL MEMBER. SO FAR MIGUEL MORALES HAS YET TO FILE ETHICS COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE OTHER TWO PANEL MEMBERS. IT IS ALLEGED THAT MIGUEL MORALES IS A SUPPORTING ASSOCIATE OF COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS, OF WHICH COUNCIL CANDIDATE JOHN BRANDIFF WILL BE IN A RUN OFF ELECTION WITH. INTERESTING SIDE NOTE, THOUGH THE PANEL FOUND NO VIOLATIONS OF THE ETHICS CODE, PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD CHAIRMAN, ROBERT ELLIOTT, SUGGESTED MORALES’ COMPLAINT OUGHT TO GO TO THE POLICE REVIEW COMMISSION. MY QUESTION IS, WILL THE REAL PANEL PLEASE STEP UP! BRANDIFF ASKED THE HARD QUESTIONS OF CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON’S RESPONSIVENESS TO THE CHIEF RUSS LEACH DUI IN 2010, WHERE RECORDS FOR HUDSON’S CITY CELL PHONE SHOWED NO INCOMING OR OUTGOING CALLS THE DAY OF THE INCIDENT UNTIL 14 HOURS AFTER THE TRAFFIC STOP. HUDSON’S EXPLANATION IS THAT HIS PHONE WAS OFF. JOHN BRANDIFF STATED, “YOU’RE TELLING ME HE WASN’T ON THE PHONE WITH ANYBODY, ABOUT ANYTHING, ALL DAY, WITH THIS GOING ON? THAT’S HARD TO BELIEVE.” THE QUESTION IN THE COMMUNITY CAME UP OF HIS PERSONAL PHONE, AND THOSE RECORDS OF COURSE ARE UNSOEPENABLE. IT IS NOT A SECRET OF COUNCILMAN’S STEVE ADAMS CLOSE RELATIONSHIP TO CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON.MICHAEL MORALES APPEALS DECISION OF NO VIOLATION OF ETHICS CODE. THE COMPLAINT WILL NOW BE HEARD AT THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 9, 2011 AT 3:00PM. MR. MORALES HAS YET TO FILE COMPLAINTS AGAINST TWO OTHER PANEL MEMBERS WHO ALSO HAVE EQUAL OR A WORSE RECORD OF ATTENDANCE. IN LIEU, THE ATTENTION REMAINS FOCUSED ON JOHN BRANDRIFF, BUT IT ALSO IS BRINGING MORE ATTENTION TO THE POLITICAL RELATIONSHIPS AND ELEMENTS BEHIND THE ETHICS FILINGS.

JEFF STONE AND THE 51ST STATE, “SOUTH CALIFORNIA”, GOOD IDEA OR BAD? HYPOTHETICALLY: CONSIDERING THERE ARE ALWAYS PRO’S AND CON’S TO AN ISSUE: IF THE CURRENT TAX FORMAT CHANGED IN THE NEWLY CHRISTENED “SOUTH CALIFORNIA”, TO ONE SUCH AS NEVADA, SUCH AS LOWER SALES TAXES, NO STATE TAXES, NO CORPORATE INCOME TAXES, NO PERSONAL INCOME TAX, NO INVENTORY TAX, NO INHERITANCE TAX, NO ESTATE TAX, WORKMANS COMP RATES BELOW NATIONAL AVERAGE, POWER COST ARE FROM 8% TO 31% LESS, ETC. BECAUSE OF THIS NEVADA IS RATED #2 IN THE NATION AS THE BEST PLACE TO GROW A BUSINESS ACCORDING TO THE SMALL BUSINESS SURVIVAL INDEX 2005, WHERE AS CALIFORNIA RANKED #49. IF “SOUTH CALIFORNIA” COULD COMPETE WITH THIS, WOULD THIS BE A GOOD ADVANTAGE TO ECONOMIC GROWTH AND ENTICE MORE BUSINESS ENTERPRISE TO COME BACK TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA?

UPDATE:07/13/2011: MARRIOTT HOTEL, FIRES 35 PEOPLE INCLUDING HEAD CHEF! IT APPEARS THAT THE PRESIDENT BHARAT “BARRY’ LALL OF PINNACLE HOTELS USA, CHANGED MANAGEMENT COMPANIES, WHICH WOULD INDICATE THE CHANGES THAT ARE OCCURRING WITHIN THE MARRIOTT, INCLUDING THE FIRING OF 35 PEOPLE.

UPDDATE:07/11/2011: COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS STATES, “I’M KIND OF NEW AND I DON’T WANT TO DISTRUPT THE PROCESS THAT’S ALREADY BEGUN”, REGARDING BEING NEXT IN LINE FOR MAYOR PRO TEMP. WHAT? IS SOMEONE KIDDING? KIND OF NEW? PAUL DAVIS IS ADEQUATELY QUALIFIED FOR THE PRO TEMP MAYOR POSITION. IS THERE SOMETHING BEING KEPT FROM THE PUBLIC THAT IS BREWING IN CITY HALL? THIS HAS TO BE THE ONLY ANSWER! ARE HIS COLLEAGUES JUST GIVING DAVIS THE COLD SHOULDER? WE CAN ONLY ASSUME BY SEEING THE PROCESS OF BEHAVIOR ON THE DAIS OF OTHER COUNCIL PEOPLE TOWARD DAVIS. IT IS ALSO INTERESTING THAT AT ONE TIME COUNCILMAN STEVE ADAMS SUPPORTER MICHAEL MORALES HAD FILED AN ETHICS COMPLAINT AGAINST PAUL DAVIS, WHICH WAS DETERMINED TO BE UNFOUNDED. WE ARE STILL EXPECTING ETHICS COMPLAINT FILINGS FROM TWO OTHER MEMBERS OF THE SAME PANEL RUN OFF COUNCIL CANDIDATE JOHN BRANDRIFF SITS ON. IT’S BEEN FOUND THAT ONE OF OTHER PANEL MEMBER, OTHER THAN BRANDIFF, HAS A THE WORST RECORD OF ATTENDANCE THAN ANY OTHER PANEL MEMBER. OTHER NEWS, SO FAR THE CITY COUNCIL HAS YET TO REVEAL DETAILS OF HOW THEY’LL CHOOSE THE NEXT CITY MANAGER. A CLOSED-DOOR DISCUSSION IS SCHEDULED AT THE COUNCIL MEETING ON TUESDAY.

UPDATE:06/24/2011: But critics say redevelopment is a way for cities to basically bankroll commercial and residential developers. Controller John Chiang, in a review of 18 redevelopment agencies including Riverside County, Palm Desert and Desert Hot Springs, found Palm Desert used redevelopment money aimed at curbing blight at a luxury golf resort. San Jose’s redevelopment agency was paying portions of city salaries with the funds, according to Chiang’s report. A poignant view of the City of Riverside, where the city created illusionary blight in order to fulfill their agenda of misappropriation of RDA funds.

UPDATE: 07/06/2011: Councilman Mike Gardner runs for Mayor! The powers to be within the city have made their decision. Mike strategically ran for Council, won, then onward to the Mayor office. Who is being groomed for the planned replacement? Someone close to the council, and ex-police officer?

UPCOMING NEWS STORIES:

1. CITY OF RIVERSIDE: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: THE CIHIGOYENETCHE, GROSSBERG & CLOUSE REPORT : THE 400 PAGE REPORT YOU’VE BEEN WAITING FOR COMING SOON! TMC HAS THE COPY OF THE REPORT THE TAXPAYER PAID $150,000.00 TO THE LAW FIRM CIHIGOYENETCHE, GROSSBERG & CLOUSE THAT CITY MANAGER BRAD HUDSON HIRED TO INVESTIGATE THE ALLEGATIONS OF FAVORITISM OF HIMSELF. TMC WILL BE REPORTING THE STORY THEY DIDN’T WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW AND WHAT THE PRESS ENTERPRISE WOULDN’T PUBLISH. THERE IS NO MAGIC IN THIS REPORT!

2. RIVERSIDE: WATER RIGHTS AND HIGH RATES – the politics of utilities. UPCOMING STORY!

3. RIVERSIDE: HERO OF THE MONTH: WATCH FOR DECEMBER 2011 – TMC’s way of honoring those who speak out, and do what is necessary to fight corruption, protect the taxpayer and the community they live in. KEEP CONNECTED FOR DECEMBER’S HEROE OF THE MONTH.

5. RIVERSIDE: CODE ENFORCEMENT: THE OTHER POLICE FORCE – The community concerns of code enforcement powers and abuse. The community speaks out with their experience of code enforcement events. Is Code Enforcement actually terrorizing the Community with financial oppression? For the majority of the Community, would just like to be left alone, have less government in their lives and on their property. Who will be the new interium Code Enforcement Czar, now that Community Development Director Scott Barber will take the position of power of interum City Manager? Will the trespassing and invasion of the Community of Riverside’s properties continue? The code enforcement officers are not happy about unfairly targeting the community, therefore let it be said, do not kill the messenger! If you are being targeted or unfairly dealt with, you need to go to the source, beginning with the new Community Development Director Czar, City Council or your local City Councilperson and The Mayor.

6. POLICING FOR PROFIT: THE PROS AND CONS OF ASSET FORFEITURE – the proper use of asset forfeiture funds and their abuse.

Thanks for your comment Suzy Smith, please give us specifics about the information in question, and we will update. Just send us your source or site information etc. If we are misinterpreting something please correct with an explaination etc.

This outstanding achievement was a result of the direction of our City Council and City employees working together to serve the community of Riverside, improve citizen access to technology and bring businesses into the City. Great job!!

Interesting blog! Is your theme custom made or did you doaolnwd it from somewhere? A design like yours with a few simple adjustements would really make my blog shine. Please let me know where you got your design. Many thanks

The people are awakening to the fact that the “Police Officers” are privately contracted through a labor association to provide police service to the city to strong arm the private joe. The “court hearing officer [judge]” is also contracted to provide hearing officer service through some other labor association or society. The Grand Jury are contracted to the county to protect the county. All while the while the city and county are claiming a republician (not party associated) form of government on their W-9 which is manditory to receive federal funding through the Highway Safety Act 23 USC 402 and 23 CFR 1250. Lets see, do I have this right? So why do we think these Private Corporations for profit work for us? Can you spell R.I.C.O.? Title 18 USC 1961?